Yet another unique Alternating Strabism phenomenon

This is a super brief note about a very short time spent trying out the app with Mrs. Nat [names have been changed to protect the innocent].

There were a few interesting things to note:

In the binocular suppression environment, the panorama vision was again present. This holds for every single person with alternating strabismus we’ve seen so far. The scene is not fit for purpose for these people. Interestingly, although there are six columns of arrows for each eye, she only saw five of one and four of another. It seems the conflict space is entirely suppressed for both eyes (?) but it requires further exploration.

In the misalignment example, something very interesting indeed happened. For Mrs. Nat, beyond a certain point the spheres just neighbour one another, but do not overlap. It may be that the more she pushes it, the more the strabismic eye falls aside, until the objects disappear off the screen or she looks past the lens. This is a good example of why we need inward facing cameras!!! Not only is this fascinating, when Mrs. Nat looks with a deliberately soft focus into the distance, she does achieve fusion, but with everything being blurred.  As soon as she tries to focus on the objects, they separate again.  This is quite counter-intuitive, to put it mildly.  This is something she has noticed with VT in general, however, so it probably isn’t linked to accommodation/vergence mismatch.  Again, we need inward facing cameras to explore this in more detail.

What happens if we use an almost random dot stereogram approach and use a repeated set of objects for one eye, so there is no position the eye can move to where one or the other is not overlapping/in fusion? Could we then isolate that one, and have it drift back into the originally identified misalignment angle?  It seems like Mrs. Nats brain is particularly determined to maintain suppression. Perhaps we just have to do more work on desensitising this kind of “allergic” reaction?

These are all, also, good examples of why we will need many cohorts of testers around the world, segmented into groups who exhibit similar symptoms.  Without that potential for quantitive feedback, we are just flying blind.